YouTube officially announced a pilot program for pay channels on its blog. In a move that was widely anticipated, the company will charge per-channel subscription fees for certain content—starting at $0.99 per month per channel. The program is launching with a selection of 53 channels, including Sesame Street and UFC. The new pay channels offer a 14-day free trial and discounted yearly rates. The actual monthly subscriptionrate varies depending on the channel—for example, the Sesame Street channel is $2.99 per month.

YouTube is rolling out 53 new pay channels, with more to come

YouTube stated that partners and content creators asked for more flexibility in monetizing their content, and this appears to be one solution. Due to the tremendous reach and popularity of YouTube.com, there can be no question that à la carte viewing has arrived. Considering the service already supports 2160p video and live streaming, this could be a very big deal—especially for live events.

Quote:

"One of the most frequent requests we hear from these creators behind them is for more flexibility in monetizing and distributing content. We’ve been working on that and wanted to fill you in on what to expect." - YouTube

The company indicated the pilot program is just the beginning and that over time users will encounter more pay channels. The blog post also suggests that YouTube will push certain channels to users, presumably based upon their viewing habits.

Quote:

"This is just the beginning. We’ll be rolling paid channels out more broadly in the coming weeks as a self-service feature for qualifying partners. And as new channels appear, we'll be making sure you can discover them, just as we've been helping you find and subscribe to all the channels you love across YouTube." - YouTube

I recently wrote a piece about how YouTube declared victory over television and the challenges it faces with bandwidth and streaming quality. Has the time come for paid YouTube channels, or is the service still too unreliable?

I think this is going to be the way. Today's young generation of kids is watching Youtube. Youtube is embeded pretty much everywhere in our TV, media players, tablets and smartphones. On my lunch, I browse Youtube myself. This could help cord-cutters and instead of having to go with a cable service provider, use Netflix, Hulu and 2 Youtube channels.

I think this is going to be the way. Today's young generation of kids is watching Youtube. Youtube is embeded pretty much everywhere in our TV, media players, tablets and smartphones. On my lunch, I browse Youtube myself. This could help cord-cutters and instead of having to go with a cable service provider, use Netflix, Hulu and 2 Youtube channels.

I see this being popular. Not right away, but soon enough.

I could tell you in no uncertain terms, I am not resubscribing to cable—but if YouTube starts featuring pay channels that cover some of the things that I miss, such as access to live sporting event broadcasts, then they will get some money from me.

I could tell you in no uncertain terms, I am not resubscribing to cable—but if YouTube starts featuring pay channels that cover some of the things that I miss, such as access to live sporting event broadcasts, then they will get some money from me.

I think this is going to be the way. Today's young generation of kids is watching Youtube. Youtube is embeded pretty much everywhere in our TV, media players, tablets and smartphones. On my lunch, I browse Youtube myself. This could help cord-cutters and instead of having to go with a cable service provider, use Netflix, Hulu and 2 Youtube channels.

I see this being popular. Not right away, but soon enough.

Another thing is that you're not forced to subscribe to the same channels. You can rotate them every few months if new content is being released slowly. Sub to channel A for a couple of months, then sub to channel B for a couple of months, then back to A when it has enough new content to last a few weeks or more. Or even unsub to everything during the summer if your not going to watch much tv. Very flexible for consumers and our wallet.

Another thing is that you're not forced to subscribe to the same channels. You can rotate them every few months if new content is being released slowly. Sub to channel A for a couple of months, then sub to channel B for a couple of months, then back to A when it has enough new content to last a few weeks or more. Or even unsub to everything during the summer if your not going to watch much tv. Very flexible for consumers and our wallet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smokarz

Agreed. I could see myself paying for sporting broadcasts coverage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by imagic

I could tell you in no uncertain terms, I am not resubscribing to cable—but if YouTube starts featuring pay channels that cover some of the things that I miss, such as access to live sporting event broadcasts, then they will get some money from me.

+1
+1
+1

I think we need to give this some time and let Youtube (Google) gain some licensing on content and let the magic role. Especially Sporting Events

The next question will have to go out to imagic - we will need you to add Youtube to your streaming service comparison to see how they stack up to the other contenders.

As long as it stays cheap, they can make money, provided the bandwidth is there, and improves. Certain times the videos can't buffer fast enough and the video hangs. These cannot be a problem for paid channels.
I think I see what they are going to do: limit paid channels and provide them the bandwidth while free channels will suffer.